October 21, 2011

The Daily Pennsylvanian reports that a sophomore said, "Yeah, it’s definitely really ironic." And an English professor said, "I think it’s a shame that a speech at a university should not occur because of some fear that there will be skeptics and critics in the audience."

The word "audience" refers to people listening. Didn't these protesters intend to chant or shout or otherwise wreck the speech? If a university arranges a speaking event for someone who is invited as an honored guest and the event transmogrifies into one in which he will serve as a platform for other people who want to yell out their ideas, then the university should expect him to decline to participate in what has become an alternate event of a sort that he would never have accepted if it had been the original invitation. To portray the erstwhile honored guest as fearful of critics and skeptics is demagoguery.

There are politicians and others who want to demonize people that have earned success in certain sectors of our society....

Instead of talking about a fair share or spending time trying to push those at the top down, elected leaders in Washington should be trying to ensure that everyone has a fair shot and the opportunity to earn success up the ladder. The goal shouldn’t be for everyone to meet in the middle of the ladder....

We must ensure that those who abuse the rules are punished. We must ensure that the solution to wealth disparity is wealth mobility. We must give everyone the chance to move up. Stability plus mobility equals agility. In an agile economy and an agile society, people are climbing and succeeding.

153 comments:

THis reminds me of something that Milton Friedman said years ago (1975-76, I think) at the University of Chicago. He was signing books in the university bookstore while some local leftist stood a few feet away screaming about "Fascist repression in Chile". When someone asked him what he thought about that, he said it didn't bother him because it provided such a clear illustration of one of the principles of economics: when your product is so repulsive that no one wants to buy it in the open market, you have to somehow find a way to borrow the market for someone else's more attractive product. That's exactly what the OWS was trying to do with Cantor, so of course they're disappointed.

This is the reason I left liberalism a long tiime ago. It is no longer liberal and it is no longer open minded. A glib Garage is what is left. A taunt for a link to the obvious. Well done OWS lefties. You shold be proud, Garage because this is what the new free speech looks like.

From the article: "About 500 to 1,000 protesters affiliated with Occupy Philadelphia planned to march from City Hall to Locust Walk in front of Huntsman to protest Cantor’s presence, according to Keystone Progress Executive Director Michael Morrill."

Then once inside, they would sit quietly and let Cantor make his speech. Right.

I've spoken to tourist who said they were turned away b4 they got there.. and one guy said, after thinking about it.. "it's not like when the temperature goes down, they will still be there, like some statutes.."

If they really want wealth equity and equal opportunity, then they would start with the abolition of tenure, whether it be teachers-for-life or other government-workers-for-life, followed by being pension-leeches-for-life.

So Santelli randomly rants, and hundreds of thousands of keep-it-clean Americans pour into the streets, all across America, with enough energy to sweep the Democrats from the House.

Barry acts like it don't exist, but in the meantime his minions Van Jones and Soros jealously try time and again to start up a leftie analogue. After about the 5th failure, they come up with OWS, a rag-tag collection of the usual anti-social leftist suspects who will be swept away with the first snows. And Barry, Nancy,and all the leftoids rush their hosannas to the power of the people.

Unfortunately, OWS has metastasized and will have to be excised. Good thing those snows are coming.

In the spring, look for try #7. Even better, look for it to start on Feb 19.

The way to smack down the hecklers, is to invite them to a podium, and make a deal with the audience. Since you've been making your case, give 'em 5 minutes, and then have the audience voice vote on who gets to continue.

Show 'em up to all the people as a bunch of unedjumicated hillbilly loudmouth boobs, and watch 'em slink out thoroughly chastened by the complete rejection by the audience.

No heckler can last 5 minutes. They'll be talking like Barry without TOTUS after 30 seconds.

"Consider the following:" = the three dirtiest words *and* (warning! pseudo-adjective ahead!) anathema phrase in political speech and politics today, which is why this sort of situation--in all of its pieces--and in all pieces of it--is destined for repetition.

There's a great deal of benefit--for *all* of the various players involved in this particular, oft-repeated (because it's effective, it must be assumed) script--in playing out the situation at hand in the exact way it played out. Dang, what a dance.

Cantor's speech is right on the mark. The way for a society to move ahead is to structure it so that people with some talent and who are willing to work hard can advance themselves economically, and those who are unwilling to work hard, can experience downward mobility as a motivator.

I appreciate that garage mahal wants a society where he doesn't have to work particularly hard. But that's not the way the American society moves forward.

It ought to be obvious that it's quite likely far more people--and a greater range and variety of people--will be exposed to Cantor's speech than would have happened had the speaking engagement gone off without a hitch. Exactly whose nose was cut off--and to spite what?

Garage. Your beliefs are on display. You are the absolute anthises of what liberals once stood for.

I don't know.. If it wasn't for people like garage we.. or speaking for myself.. I would get lazy.. garage keeps me on my toes..

One thing about garage.. I don't think there is any question when it comes to the love for our nation, the USA.. we should.. at least I consider him on the same side.. garage is a fellow countrymen that would go through great lengths, would do whatever he could to make sure it survives.

Got out of the K-street super-consultant shindig. Drunk a few shots of Irish whiskey with a hot date. All my sources at the WH and on the Hill say the same thing: GOP is scared. They have no idea, none at all, what is coming to their end next November. GOP is like a quarter-back who is blind-sided. He is about to get sacked or intercepted by the free safety (i.e. occupy protesters around the nation). My sources in the media (NYT and NPR) say the same thing. The Pew poll shows that GOP is scared, very sacred of the next election. Perry is the nominee. What fun for us who willingly, gladly, support the POTUS Obama re-election.

cassandra lite is tracking the correct spoor here. "Scratch a Russian and you'll find a Tartar" is an old saying: "Scratch a lefty and you'll find a potential Robespierre" is even more universally and consistently, usefully applicable..

Some people didn't believe me when I first told them you monitored these comment threads, and that you were intentionally letting all the racist, anti-semitic, threatening commentary stand while deleting ones that exposed your pet trolls.

I suspect most people not familiar with Philadelphia have no idea what the city is like nowadays. It is Detroit, ten years ago. Eric Cantor at Penn is a crazy concept-- great to think he'd be brave enough to do it, but unsurprising that he'd back out.

I admire Michael Nutter, Philly mayor, for trying. He's crazy to do it. The city is disintegrating.

What is the message Byro the TP Sockpup-on-crack? No one's flying swastikas (except you, when no one's looking), making anti-semitic slurs, or saying he should be subjected to violence. Just that's a corrupt capitalist POS--not to say coward. Unlikely it would have been much of deal--he could have called the Uni. cops and busted heads anyway. Yr the censor here, stoner-trash

Why not just deliver it remotely via webcast? You get credit for delivering the speech, the media reports excerpts and imagery of some ranting, bed-wetting fanatics throwing old vegetables at a flat screen display, and they don't get to beat their chests about stopping the speech. Why not?

Garage. You bore me. You are shallow. Tiresome. Your blind support for loud boorish "protest" reflects your inability to articulate anything other than talking points and like the OWS crowd you are not particularly well informed about what you proport to be for. Or against. Without exception you defend the indefensible I notice that amongst those who regularly comment here you never acknowledge the validity of any other persons point of view. I have tried but i am bored with your closed mind.

Fun tutorial: successfully put into action filtering, designating spam and blocking threads and so forth for the first time ever. Always a good thing to learn that knowledge--tools--a whole array of them--put away for a rainy day do pay off when needed.

I don't think the parents of the students at the Univ of Penn are among the wretched of the earth. The students are privileged children and the way that they celebrate their privilege is shouting down elected officials with whom they disagree.... What does the 1st amendment stand for, if not the right to silence those prick Republicans. Thank God we live in a free country where the Constitution enshrines our right to silence those bastards.....When I start seeing back office clerks from Chase and Goldman joining the OWS protest, I will commence worrying about the revolution. As long as I have been alive, the revolutionary class in America (anyway the white part of it) has been upper middle class white kids playing their Che games.

I'm with Lem. Garage generally argues and doesn't call names. Sometimes he (she?) makes good points. This isn't always an easy venue for someone with Garage's political leanings, and he/she has been a good player.

Hail Garage! Heck, "garage mahal" all by itself is one of the best screen names I've ever seen. That's worth something.

"Join the Althouse comments community. Be interesting or concise. Or something! Click "Post Comment" to publish. If your comment doesn't post, it's the spam filter. Email me for help with that."

If you repost the same comment over and over, it will just get caught over and over in the spam filter. If you think that means I am deleting it over and over, you are mistaken. I'm just looking at the spam filter and seeing that someone posted the same comment about 60 times. Apparently, you think I just sat here deleting you 60 times. If you really believed that, and you intentionally tried to subject me to all that trouble... you are slime.

Other privileged children of other parents were responsible to begin with for choosing to bring Cantor to the campus to speak. Is it a requirement somewhere for to lump everyone into clumps--to the point that folks end up classifying even their supposed own as nothing more than humps.

Big Mike said...Cantor's speech is right on the mark. The way for a society to move ahead is to structure it so that people with some talent and who are willing to work hard can advance themselves economically, and those who are unwilling to work hard, can experience downward mobility as a motivator.===============The problem with Cantors philosophy is that the growing income disparity and concentration of wealth is driven in large part by factors outside the notion that if everyone "just works hard to advance themselves globally" will narrow those disturbing gaps.

1. Globalization and free trade has devalued the wage that much of the workforce can command.2. The level of renumeration for Elites has greatly increased from levels such people in the private jobs market and in government used to command. The growing multiples of income Elites have is well known. But Metro Washington DC just became America's wealthiest area because the average Fed employee now averages 147,000 in wages, plus the famous Federal benefits.3. Mass immigration, including the illegal sort, tends to benefit those immigrants and those Elites at the top from higher profits...while leaving those in the middle to suffer lower wages and also subsidize the immigranst and their Elite employers through higher local taxes and health insurance costs.4. The disparity in income does not end at a HS or college degree level. Renumeration is now far more dependent on elite schools and elite degrees no longer normally accessible for white middle class males that are smart and work hard. A Yale Law spot is even tougher to win for them than just 10 years ago. 5. More and more, the people who create wealth - value added workers - see wages stagnated or declining while the greatest renumeration goes to people who generate no wealth but who occupy middlemen positions taking wealth from others.

Lem: "But when they say "nobody has gone to jail for the abuses" - I have no answer."

It's a tricky thing. If they start to prosecute the bankers, the bankers will start to spill the real pressures they got from the Congress, Regulators and White House.

Even the executives at Bank of America were not irrational enough to go ahead with the Countrywide and Merrill Lynch deals without government pressure. It may be a long time--if ever--before we know what really happened there.

As I understand it, the speaking invite was part of Wharton's Distinguished series, and that is not chopped liver.

I doubt very much the OP folks are Penn students, and further, they are in no way Wharton students. Rather, they are the usual red guard, and U-Penn, itself, NOT Wharton initiated the group-grope for whatever reason.

"Renumeration is now far more dependent on elite schools and elite degrees no longer normally accessible for white middle class males that are smart and work hard. A Yale Law spot is even tougher to win for them than just 10 years ago."

Firstly, I don't think that a person has to go to an Ivy to do very well.

Secondly, the notion that the Ivys were ever in anyone's most ridiculous fantasy *accessible* steams and stinks like the pile of manure it is.

And above and beyond the first and second point... prove that income disparity means something important.

Do you know why we whine about income disparity? It's because if we tried to claim we were actually poor we'd swallow our tongues. Same reason we talk about "food insecurity" in the US instead of hunger. Someone *worried* about buying groceries. The horror!

In some of my reading for class there was a sample essay that made this argument (mostly unintended, I'm sure) - The relatively wealthy in relation to their society (thus specifically excluding the relatively unwealthy) have a moral obligation to stop global, absolute, poverty. Not doing so is the same as murder, because deaths could have been prevented, which is the same as murder *and* saying that the wealthy should only have to give if they want to is presented as a counter argument, so the assumption is confiscation by force.

Note, please... those persons who, in comparison to the absolute poverty in the world, are wealthy BUT who are not wealthy by the standards of their own cultures/societies are not obligated to save any lives, even though they certainly could.

That's why we whine so loudly about income disparities. If we are poor despite our riches, we're free of the moral obligations that wealth brings. Fat babies.

What other possible reason could there be to spend so much time and effort convincing ourselves and everyone else that we're oppressed, poverty stricken, and what all, when by any other possible measure even our lower middle-class is obscenely wealthy?

It's healthier to count your blessings. But perhaps it's more romantic to talk yourself into an angsty funk.

"More and more, the people who create wealth - value added workers - see wages stagnated or declining while the greatest renumeration goes to people who generate no wealth but who occupy middlemen positions taking wealth from others."

This part I agree with. And how much of the porkulus went directly to those "generate no wealth" government employees? No one wants to do without services, but they cost, they don't produce.

Banks aren't the only institutions that should be allowed to fail. A local government that refuses to plan for the lean times deserves to fail, too.

It is pathetic that lefties on campus so frequently shout down non lefty speakers. Are they afraid to let the non lefty speak or is the non lefty simply not entitled to speak because what he has to say is guaranteed to be false and detestable? Anyway, it is the opposite of what a university is supposed to be about.

Academia has been captured by the left and the result is terrible. The best, most efficient solution is to starve the funding to public universities and transition to much more efficient, much cheaper, and much less politicized computer based universities. Focus more on getting accredited in narrow areas that will get you a job much faster and cheaper. As the job market changes, return to computer based school to get some more narrowly focused training that will get you a new job.

Honestly, while the protesters were typically rude and obnoxious, I don't think the student body missed out on hearing the next Gettysburg Address here. Cantor's prepared speech is pretty content-free: "we must do good things, and avoid bad things, and punish people who do bad things, so that people who do good things are rewarded". Blah blah blah.

In Texas, Rick Perry is working on radically reducing the cost of getting a BA or BS degree. Obviously academia is crying like stuck hogs but it will surely happen, probably first in Texas and then spread across America.

A key step down the road will be standardizing content and tests in common courses so that standardized test results can be compared across the country. This will permit a precise comparison between graduates of traditional universities and graduates of computer based universities.

Obviously this can also be done at the grade school, middle school, and high school levels. The end result should be much cheaper public education (lower school taxes), devastating to university academia and public school teacher employment and unions, and radically reduce politicizing of education and brain washing via education. These programs should also make it much easier to home school kids, especially smart kids.

C4 - if you are smart and get a good engineering degree you can earn $100K after 5-7 years in the industry. Doesn't matter where you came from or whether you went to an "elite" school. It's all about what's in your head. Maybe we need more emphasis on math and less on "social studies".

What I can't understand, is why Cantor would even think that he could go to the University of Pennsylvania, or the U of Wisconsin for that matter, and expect to give a speech without it being shouted down. The only places in this once great country where freedom of speech isn't allowed are on the campuses of universities.

The only bright spot is that these students will be in debt for most of their lives. Good luck getting a job with that kind of attitute. See you on the street banging on a drum.

Revenant said... Honestly, while the protesters were typically rude and obnoxious, I don't think the student body missed out on hearing the next Gettysburg Address here. Cantor's prepared speech is pretty content-free: "we must do good things, and avoid bad things, and punish people who do bad things, so that people who do good things are rewarded". Blah blah blah."

10/22/11 1:41 AM-----------------------------I agree with what you say but at Ivy League schools common sense is an uncommon virtue..hence the need for repetition.

In London the Occupy crowd, the open minded crowd, the crowd always eager to support free speech today achieved what has not happened since the London blitz. They forced St Pauls Cathedral. People coming to worship were turned away.

So, one man, Eric Cantor, refuses to give his speech in front of 500 protesters, and Mitochondri-Allie, monkeyboy and garage consider him to be a coward. Yeah, that's rich. You three are what, tough guys?

"AllenS said...From the article: 500 demonstrators were at the protest.

So, one man, Eric Cantor, refuses to give his speech in front of 500 protesters, and Mitochondri-Allie, monkeyboy and garage consider him to be a coward. Yeah, that's rich. You three are what, tough guys?"

Can't speak of the other two, but garage is. He went right up to Marjie Phelps and gave her the finger and called her a bitch. Right up to her. Yep. I mean I know she's a fat 70 year old woman who never has hit a counter protester, but he went right up to her. Called her a bitch and gave her the finger. Wasn't a pussy like Cantor. Nope.

3. Mass immigration, including the illegal sort, tends to benefit those immigrants and those Elites at the top from higher profits...while leaving those in the middle to suffer lower wages and also subsidize the immigranst and their Elite employers through higher local taxes and health insurance costs.

Amen. Which is why the Dems politicians support illegal immigration so strongly. It enriches their corporate buddies, especially in the businesses heavily dependent on unskilled labor.

Illegals take jobs (thats why they come here) and drive down wages. The useful idiots that fall for the "they do the work Americans won't do" and other such bullshit are nothing but useful idiots. Americans were doing those jobs. The only thing that changed was the presence of illegal aliens who would work for illegally low wages, no benefits, live in sub-par housing, etc.

The people I was talking about were garage and M-A. They may be nice people on the inside, but if they want their public face to be one that supports facism, then that is the one I respond to.

For clarity - Garage and M-A are supporting bullying, facism and ignoring the real issues of theft and assault at the occupy protests because it helps them politically to have others commit violence on their behalf. Personally - I'm agin it.

Sixty Grit, Many of the protesters at Kent State were savages for whom a lead injection was an entirely reasonable response. They burned down the ROTC building, prevented firemen from responding, things like that. You glorify these creeps because you're not too bright.

The problem with social studies is not that they are over emphasized at the expense of math and science;but rather that they are neglected and misdirected at the secondary level. Social studies were not even included on the state middle-school and high-school standardized tests until recently. To be certified to teach secondary social studies—as I was—one is supposed to be able to teach free-market economics, world and US history, geography, civics and government, and the US Constitution. However, the powers that be who control the public school curriculum are not interested teaching these things. Instead, they are interested in teaching multiculturalism, feminism, conflict resolution, political activism and a bunch of other feel-good ideas. The 6th grade history book I taught from had more information about Buddha than about Jesus. It also contained more about Hap Shep Sut, the only female pharaoh, than about all the other pharaohs. In many public schools, social studies is taught as a secondary duty of an athletic coach, therefore it is just not that teacher's primary concern.

"They haven't one armed among them. They'd better hope there isn't a reign of terror because they're going to lose the war."

Speaking as someone who deeply sympathizes with the OWS demonstrations, I can say that I certainly DO hope there aren't any reigns of terror. I find it disconcerting to see commenters on the blogosphere either implying subtly, or stating outright, that it would be a good thing if we had a whole lot of political violence in this country. Another way of describing that, after all, is terrorism.

Thank goodness you are decent enough to be joining the vast majority of OWSers and of those who disagree with them, in recognizing it would be a tragedy if things turned bloody.

You also write,

"That's why they only gather in gun-free zones.

They think they're safe there."

And, any decent person would hope that they are right to think so. I'm glad you are glad, that they are safe there. And I would share yourt horror if guns were turned upon them.

It's vital. It's exciting. Like the revolution and the romantic revolutionaries of the past that are celebrated, being able to experience that is exhilarating. Being on the cusp edge of History makes the heart beat faster.

How much of OWS (or OYT) is nostalgia for the 60s? When someone mentions needing a Kent State equivalent, what is that? I'm the rabble and I demand the powerful bow to my demands!

Calling for the pitchforks, calling for a pogrom, hinting about violence for the cause, demanding that the rich be punished, their worldly wealth stolen and given to those who deserve it, all of it makes the assumption that when the revolutionaries turn to violence, or even simply vandalize, it's never going to be directed at you. It assumes that when the government takes your money to redistribute it, you'll always get back more than you had taken. You are on the side of the revolutionaries. You're the good-guy. And none of it is going to fall on you.

The way to smack down the hecklers, is to invite them to a podium, and make a deal with the audience. Since you've been making your case, give 'em 5 minutes, and then have the audience voice vote on who gets to continue.

When I was at UC/Berkeley in the mid-80s, a general faculty/TA strike was called in support of the university divesting from (then-Apartheid) South Africa. I was taking first-semester physics at the time, from a famously Lefty professor. on the Friday the strike was called, the lecture was replaced by an open discussion about Apartheid. Monday the strike was extended, and the professor began another open discussion about Apartheid. At this point, a student called out, "Excuse me, but I'd rather be learning physics." Murmurs of agreement all over the hall (this is a massive lecture class, several hundred students). The professor, who was principled even if (IMO) a bit off his head, put it to a vote, and the class voted for physics. So he taught.

Didn't prevent him showing a film about nuclear winter in lieu of the last lecture of the semester, though ;-)

There's a reason these things are rarely put to a vote. The audience is perilously likely to vote the wrong way.

Jeff, on this blog, and especially on this thread, absolutely you are correct. That is why I said I share nevadabob (as well as your own) good cheer that they are absolutely right to believe that they are safe, though not one among them is unarmed.

I'm more and more convinced that the last 40 or 50 years has produced a large minority of college and university graduates, who may be intelligent in the sense that their median IQ is 115, but they are neither educated nor wise. Many are just plain STUPID.

But the pendulum is swinging in the direction of eliminating our present 12 year HS Certification and 4 year College Certification.

If it takes 16 years to produce STUPID CITIZENS. Why not take 12 years to produce educated, trained citizens prepared to meet the world. Too many Colleges and Universities as they now exist are a DISASTER ZONE.

"Like, I would wager, most Americans who have thought about it, I harbor no illusions whatsoever who would suffer the most, were political violence to break out in this country."

And who gets their money stolen and given to others?

Also, nice qualification, those "who have thought about it." I never suggested that it took more than thinking it through to know it was all going to turn and bite you in the ass. It's not rocket science, it's simply "they came for the Jewish bankers, and I wasn't a Jewish banker, so I did nothing... etc."

The "committee of public safety" is never going to harsh your mellow. The "committee of public safety" is never going to finger the wrong person or fail to listen. The "committee of public safety" is never going to try to hush up scandal instead of going after offenders.

Your free pony is a reasonable demand and the only reason that you can't have a free pony is because of the meanies who want to hoard all the ponies. So you demand that the government begin taking ponies away from those who have them in order to distribute them fairly. The government is never going to take your pony, or demand conditions for your pony, or give you a pony that you didn't really want because you wanted a different pony.

Your ulta-democratic committee that votes on how to use the donated (not produced or earned) funds available is never going to vote that you don't need your drums.

I am a prof. @ Penn, and was holding office hours when the mob walked past on Walnut St. That crowd seemed small (<150?) and definitely not composed primarily of students. Nor other profs, certainly. The crowd was loud & rude, but not threatening. One participant glowered at me, probably because I was in a suit & tie.

Well cleartly, now, you have shifted points of discussion. After first implying that the protestors, and those who sympathize with the protestors, romanticize violence and Revolution; after implying that these same somehow believe that were violence to break out, they would magically emerge victorious; after all of that fantasizing, I essentially reminded you that this is fantasizing.

And so now you seem to me to be going after the arguments that the protestors are making. Which is better. But because the argument you are making resonates so profoundly with the most paranoid rantings of Ayn Rand, it is hard for me to find something in there applicable to the actual state of affairs.

Oh but wait. You also churn out the ole "they came for the Jewish bankers." So never mind, it is clear you remain intent on the "they want to do political violence!!!!" absurdity.

Not to mention the fact that the anti-Semitism schtick in this context poisons the well totally, and makes productive conversation impossible. All of a sudden one is expected to say "no, no, I'm not an anti-Semite!", or some such rot.

Is that what you are trying to do?

Exit Question: who in their heart really believes that the charge of anti-Semitism is going to make anti-corporate sentiment go away?

I think Eric Cantor did the right thing. Philly's not his district so he has no scintilla of obligation to speak at a contentious gathering that does not include his constituents.

A couple of notes on Philadelphia: we have a way to go before we become Detroit, because there's a lot more here than some dying auto factories. We are a huge beds, ed, and meds center -- tourism, higher education, medicine -- and have some other robust sectors. After years of population decline, we enjoyed modest growth according to the 2010 census.

I don't believe it's possible to block people from the UPenn campus. Public streets run through it, and if memory serves the University had to guarantee public access when a couple streets were closed to create walkways. Heck, they even had to guarantee public access to their open-stack library, although that's restricted to M-F 9-5 and reading days are exempted.

Among plain old folks, there's a fair degree of eyerolling about the Occupants on Dilworth Plaza. They're going to be moved across the street in a few weeks because the Plaza is scheduled for a massive upgrade. It will be interesting to see what the combination of the move and the coming cold weather does for the movement.

"The goal shouldn’t be for everyone to meet in the middle of the ladder...." It's not just a the clean math calculation embodied in the sum of all income earned divided by the number of "earners." In actual fact, the class warfare actions conducted under the name of "regulations" and the subsidizing of union obstructionism turn the solid ground under the ladder into a mud hole so that everyone on the ladder sinks downward into the muck.

"Not to mention the fact that the anti-Semitism schtick in this context poisons the well totally..."

Oh wow, do you think so?

Ever think that the poison in the well is BLAMING SOMEONE ELSE?

It doesn't matter who is blamed. So sometimes it's Jew Bankers. Next time it's someone else. The poison is identifying any group of people as the villain. People will too much money. Privileged people.

The professional denizens of academia believe it will never be them, either, because they're supporting the People against the State and the People against the Rich and are calling for redistribution as well.

Look at History. When EVER have intellectuals come out on top in this sort of revolution?

"Look at History. When EVER have intellectuals come out on top in this sort of revolution?

How about never."

Not arguing with you there. Hopefully nobody is seriously entertaining the possiblity that "intellectuals" are in any danger of having significant input, let alone control, over US policy.

Anyone who is "romanticizing" an outbreak of political violence ion the United States, in any case, I feel terribly sorry for. Whatever their perspective, whatever outcome they think would happen.

And allow me to break out the world's smallest violen for the poor downtrodden wealthy, the CEOs, etc. How abused they are, how disenfranchised.

Please. There has been mass demonization of public employees, all sorts of blame laid at their feet, for the last several years, and the television media has lapped up the charges like sweet sweet nectar. Eric Cantor specifically and the whole GOP leadership generally, are only engaging in theater of the absurd, with the whole "don't pit Americans against other Americans" thing.

All my sources at the WH and on the Hill say the same thing: GOP is scared

Right, which is why Obama's bill died in the Senate with Democratic defections. And why Obama is "toxic" to many Democrats running for reelection. And why Obama is sinking to class warfare demogoguery.

It's because the Dems are ascendant and the GOP is scared.

What cracks me up about OWS is how the left has been so hungry for good news, any good news, that they're latching onto OWS as if it were some broad-based movement that represents the silent majority. I think the polls they point to are off. If you poll on specific issues, OWS looks popular--but then the Tea Party looks just as popular. But real support for the actual OWS? I doubt it. Even here in SF, among my hipster and arty-type friends, people are ambivalent about OWS. The other week they came marching through Dolores Park--which should be ground zero for OWS support--and got a collective yawn.

@Cedarford, if you're still around this thread, sorry for not getting back but I've been pretty busy. Need to rake leaves while the sun's still out.

I think you make a number of good points, particularly numbers 1 and 5. But as regards point #4, I think you're confusing where one starts off with where one ends up. I, for one, don't hire Ivy grads. I've been burned too often buy people thinking that their Ivy degree means they can coast forever after. Doesn't work for me. Every day I come to work I think that I have to prove myself all over again, and that's the sort of people I want working for and with me.

What bothers me about the society that the Democrats seem to be driving toward is that they want to reward the person who got into the elite school and graduated with a bull***t degree and punish the sort of people that I want to work with.

The left seems eager to claim pot-smoking Buddhist Steve Jobs as one of their own, but leaving aside the reality that he would have been aborted had Roe v. Wade been decided in 1953 vice 1973, could Jobs and Wozniak have gotten their company going in today's regulatory climate? Jobs himself didn't think so!

"And allow me to break out the world's smallest violen for the poor downtrodden wealthy, the CEOs, etc. How abused they are, how disenfranchised."

Why do you insist on seeing this emotionally? Someone doesn't hate on the rich, thinks that it's unwise to vilify the rich, and this must be emotional?

It's unwise historically to chose political scapegoats. It's unwise economically to vilify the creators of wealth. It's unwise spiritually, to feed inner covetous resentment. At no point is it necessary to feel *sorry* for those vilified.

I'm not going to watch an entire episode of Jon Stewart to see what he said about something.

Life is hard for everyone right now. Some people are trying to keep their spirits up, stay positive, work hard and make it through. If you accept other people's whining as legitimate, how are you supposed to feel about your own life?

It's not an entire episode, it's one clip. And Stewart doesn;t say much of anything for the bulk of it. And it is very relevant to your continuing refrain about the evils of scapegoating.

Because the clip reminds us that the GOP leaders, very much including Cantor (the hero of this thread! he's a hero!) have been overtly demonizing a spectrum of persons not thought of as Republican voters, for years.

It's "the gays," it's "the unions," it's public employees, it's feminists, it's academics, it's the poor. It's these sorts of people who have damaged the country. But if you even dare to speak out against the people who actually control the country and its government to the fucking nines, then you are engaged ni scapegoating.

Because people think that Cantor was right to cancel a speech that would most certainly be disrupted to the extent of being made impossible... he's a hero. Okay, so people think that was the right choice.

At what point does it say anything else about anything else about Cantor? It could be anyone deciding not to participate in someone elses tantrum. It's got little to do with Cantor as a person and nothing at all to do with Cantor as representative of certain opinions.

People think that ad hominems is calling names. It's not. It's THIS. It's the notion that this whole conversation from beginning to end has anything to do with the man, so the man must be attacked.

Sure, some people liked his published speech, others didn't so much, makes no difference.

Why do you have to imbue emotion into everything? I don't mean that you're being emotional, but that all your judgments are based on emotion. Cantor has to be a hero if he's not a villain, and which one he is determines what is true.

Maybe that's why you're confused about scapegoating, too. If someone disagrees with someone or thinks that a particular agenda is damaging, it's obviously demonizing the person? Every single thing they are involved with must be evil, too, because they are evil?

Feminism is a group of ideas. Public unions are a political force with an agenda. People can be hyperbolic about politics. So what. Look at what feminists have said about men, or unions have said about any number of people.

Obama has been hyperbolic about businesses out for profit, doctors who cut off limbs for profit... what about those remarks? Or are you a hypocrite. I get emails every few days from a local Dem pol explaining how the Tea Party wants to destroy America. Lets not forget how your side called them terrorists and worse than terrorism, wanting, trying to destroy the nation.

Or did you simply not hear that part?

Looking at big business and vilifying it all is different than arguments over ideas. This is not arguments over ideas. This is finding an enemy to blame.

Powerful corporations that our government is powerless to do anything about, controlling government... seriously? Our humongous government and all its regulations and interferences is soooooo powerless that we don't even have a democracy, right? In order to get a democracy we need to throw over actual elections in places like Wisconsin and grow the federal government until it is powerful enough to face down the corporations who... I donno... do they meet somewhere to plot how they're going to steal all of our money and run the country into the ground?

The government is the only actor in this scenario that stays powerful, no matter how wretched the economy becomes, no matter if bills can't be paid, no matter what happens to the rest of us.